Columnist Dean Juipe: Don’t take NFL ban too seriously

Dean Juipe

Monday, Jan. 20, 2003 | 9:32 a.m.

Dean Juipe's column appears Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday and Friday. His boxing notebook appears Thursday. Reach him at juipe@lasvegassun.com or (702) 259-4084.

Provincialism is an inescapable trait that affects each of us. When something hits too close to home we rise up in what often amounts to an exaggerated protest.

Such is the case with the National Football League rejecting a suggestive, if not risque, commercial touting Las Vegas. The ad was to have run Sunday during the telecast of the league's conference finals, but was blocked not so much because it was naughty but because the NFL doesn't want its relationship with Las Vegas to be perceived as too nice.

Yet the ensuing uproar, not just here but elsewhere, served the city at least as well as the commercial was designed to do. One voice after another made mention of the league's hypocritical nature -- it does, after all, quietly enjoy the point spread and betting aspects of its games, as well as the fact it employes any number of part-time criminals -- while wondering why Las Vegas should be excluded from its advertising rolls.

But it's much ado about nothing, in many respects.

And that's because slowly and ever so surely, the major pro sports leagues are finding their everyday business dealings frequently intertwine with casino-related interests. It's a process that is continuing to evolve and one that someday may prove to be seamless.

For instance, while the Las Vegas vs. the NFL ad flap was stealing headlines last week, two perhaps more significant stories were underplayed. In one, the Calgary Flames of the National Hockey League have applied for a casino operator's license, and, in the other, the Women's National Basketball Association is close to placing a team in Connecticut that would play in an arena at the Mohegan Sun Casino in Uncasville.

For those who believe that Las Vegas will never acquire a major sports franchise simply because of its gambling culture, think again. Precedents are already being set.

Additionally, if the Sacramento Kings weren't such a beloved property in California, the National Basketball Association team could easily be moved to Las Vegas, given that its owner -- the Maloof family -- has ties here by virtue of also owning the Palms casino/hotel. The NBA's only requirement as it pertains to gambling and the Maloofs is an insignificant one: the Palms can't post lines on the league's games.

What I'm saying is that it's our own indifference to live sports -- and not our preponderance of gaming halls -- that's preventing us from already having a big-league team. The leagues have bent and will continue to bend when it comes to accommodating owners and ownership demands that pertain to gambling.

If the Calgary Flames can be playing while bettors under the same roof are simultaneously wagering on table games, slots and video-poker machines, then we're almost to an era where anything goes. Likewise, if a crowd entering or exiting a WNBA game in Connecticut has to make its way through a casino, it's only a matter of time before such comings and goings are thought to be second nature.

So don't take the NFL's ban on Las Vegas and its seductive TV ads too seriously. The city got a lot of mileage out of the controversy and, besides, someday not too far down the road it will almost certainly have the last laugh.